PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 645, H.R. 2729 is laid on the table.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 18, 2004
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission Efficiency Act of 2004 - Amends the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) to increase the membership of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) from three to five. Requires the presence of three of such five members to constitute a quorum.
Includes an individual's legal training among possible qualifications for OSHRC membership.
Authorizes the President to extend for up to 365 days the term of an OSHRC member until a nominated successor is confirmed to serve by the Senate.
People & committees
Rep. Norwood, Charles W. [R-GA-9] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 645, H.R. 2729 is laid on the table.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 228 - 199 (Roll no. 184).
House roll call 184 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 228 - 199 (Roll no. 184).
House roll call 184 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3130-3131, H3161)
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 645, the House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 2729.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2728, H.R. 2729, H.R. 2730, H.R. 2731 and H.R. 2432.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 645. (consideration: CR H3115-3123; text of measure as reported in House: CR H3115)
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 645 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2728, H.R. 2729, H.R. 2730, H.R. 2731 and H.R. 2432.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 275.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 108-486.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 108-486.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 24 - 20.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by the Yeas and Nays: 7 - 6.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1483)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2729 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2729 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2729 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2729 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.